Natural Law: Indian Scenario The Hindu legal system is perhaps the oldest legal system in the world. Hindus established a logical and comprehensive law from the beginning. According to Hindu understanding, the law owes its existence to God. The law is provided for in “Shruti” and “Smritis”. The king must apply this law, and he is bound by it, and the king is disobedient if he violates this law. The Puranas are full of occasions when kings have been dethroned and beheaded when they were contrary to accepted law. 3.1.6. Middle Ages The opinions of Thomas Aquinas are considered representative of the new theory.
His social views are comparable to those of Aristotle. The law, according to Thomas Aquinas, is “an ordinance of reason for the common good, created by him who has cared for and proclaimed the community.” Thomas Aquinas classified the laws, namely, (1) God`s law or external law, (2) the natural law revealed by “reason,” (3) divine law or scriptural law, (4) human laws, which we now call “positive law.” Natural law is part of God`s law. It is this component that manifests itself in natural reason. He examined the power of the Church to interpret divine law. Therefore, it also has the power to judge the goodness of positive law. Social choice theory is the systematic study of how individual preferences or another indicator of individual well-being can be combined into a collective ranking. Although scholars have been concerned about this problem for centuries, the greatest intellectual advance in social choice theory occurred in the last century, with Arrow`s astonishing “impossibility theorem” and the development of the notion of “welfare function.” The latter construction serves as the basis for many disciplines of economics (such as optimal tax theory or the economics of climate change). It also provides a rigorous and comprehensive framework for thinking about cost-benefit analysis – currently the dominant policy tool within the US government. This course provides an introduction to social choice theory, with particular emphasis on the welfare function and cost-benefit analysis. In addressing these questions, we will also spend a lot of time discussing philosophical literatures on well-being and inequality.
What is the connection between a person`s well-being and their preferences, happiness or the achievement of various “objective goods”? And, with any notion of well-being, how should we structure policy decisions to take into account the distribution of individual well-being? To address these issues, it is essential to think clearly about collective decision-making, and in particular about social protection functions and cost-benefit analyses. Each of the different law schools has a particular conception of what a legal system is or what it should be. Natural law theorists emphasize the rights and duties of government and the governed. Positive law presupposes that law is only the command of a sovereign, the political power to which the governed will obey. Recent writings in the various schools of legal thought emphasize long-standing models of government by the rich over others (the CLS school) and by men over women (ecofeminist legal theory). Natural law is the moral theory of jurisprudence and often states that laws should be based on ethics and morality. This law also states that the law should focus on what is “right.” In general, natural law is a philosophy of law that focuses on the laws of nature. The right-wing realist school flourished in the 1920s and 1930s as a reaction to the historical school. Legal realists have pointed out that some laws and doctrines need to be changed or modernized to stay current, as life and society are constantly changing. The social context of the law was more important to legal realists than the formal application of precedents to current or future litigation. Instead of assuming that judges inevitably acted objectively by applying an existing rule to a set of facts, legal realists observed that judges had their own beliefs, operated in a social context, and made legal decisions based on their beliefs and social context.
[8] Analytical School of Justice, legalbites, (14. September 2019), www.legalbites.in/analytical-school-jurisprudence/ Legal positivism is the view that the content of the law depends on social facts and that the existence of a legal system is not limited by morality. [32] In legal positivism, theorists agree that the content of law is a product of social facts, but theorists disagree on whether the validity of law can be explained by the inclusion of moral values. [33] Legal positivists who oppose the inclusion of moral values to explain the validity of the law are called exclusive (or hard) legal positivists. Joseph Raz`s legal positivism is an example of exclusive legal positivism. Legal positivists who argue that the validity of the law can be explained by the inclusion of moral values are called inclusive (or soft) legal positivists. The legal positivist theories of H. L.A. Hart and Jules Coleman are examples of inclusive legal positivism. [34] CLS was officially founded in 1977 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison conference, but its roots go back to earlier, when many of its founding members participated in the social activism surrounding the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War. CLS`s founders drew on non-legal fields such as social theory, political philosophy, economics, and literary theory.
